Quote: Butterfly, remember in all of this that I am an omnivore, and I believe that humans are not 'superior' animals with any extra 'rights' or privelidges than other creatures.What our dominance and self awareness does give us however, is greater responsibility.In a world where creatures are farmed, bred in captivity, and slaughtered in controlled and humane fashion, there is no place, as far as I am concerned, for taking the life of a wild animal.

Believe me, I do understand your considerations. And, again, I simply think it is a matter of perspective. In the States, because of human kind, we have managed to have taken some of the predators out of the picture so wild herds of deer have to be slaughtered or euthenized because of it. Hunting fits a function in that case for wildlife management. In cases where hunting is not allowed, they place government funded operations into affect to kill the animals so that starvation and overcrowding issues are resolved.

Also, I don't believe we have any more rights than other animals. We are both lifted up and cursed by our brains to be smarter than the creatures around us, not better. And sometimes we lack the wisdom to apply our mental powers as well as we should. But we are also omnivores and predators, as you mentioned, and having owned a dog and found he had killed rodents in the past, I'll not disabuse him that side of his being, nor consul others who hunt that this is not something right or proper when done ethically. We are stewards of the wild, if you like, and some of whom happen to be hunters who don't want the wilderness to be evaporated into some large cement covered strip mall.

you and I both know that livestock are monitored and shown great care. We work in environs that hold such animals, that could never be described as 'free range' or 'organic', but they are treated humanely.Slaughter houses are strictly monitored (in the UK at least), and methods used are quick.I merely contest that an animal born for slaughter, that would never have existed if not for the purpose of slaughter, and that has never known 'freedom' or the persuit of its nature in a free habitat, is not as tragic a death as that of an Animal born free, living its life running the gauntlet of desease, natural predators, climate and thriving over all set against it, only to be snuffed from existance by a weekend davey-crocket with a high powered rifle and thermo-scope.

Quote: Also, I don't believe we have any more rights than other animals. We are both lifted up and cursed by our brains to be smarter than the creatures around us, not better. And sometimes we lack the wisdom to apply our mental powers as well as we should. But we are also omnivores and predators, as you mentioned, and having owned a dog and found he had killed rodents in the past, I'll not disabuse him that side of his being

But dogs also have an instinct to protect territory aggressively, and to choose their own place to cr4p, and nip at small squealing children. We socialise them from a young age to teach them not to act on these instincts, we guide them into being more compatible companions.

Why then, do we not 'socialise' our own species as effectively, so as to become better companions to the Earth?

so degrees of cruelty and tolerance towards it?.....either the *use* of animals for vermin humans is acceptable or not. you really cant compartmentalise this imo.

Of course you can. Accepting that it is human nature to eat meat, and rely on the death of certain animals for staple food source is stage one. Stage two, is to use our compassion and self awareness to understand that such practice causes suffering no matter how it is done, but in that realisation, strive to find the most humane path to the meeting of our needs.

lots of shades of grey. do you eat canned tuna?. a wild fish that has run the gauntlet of disease, other predators etc i.e. not reared and slaughtered in a controled 'humane' envioroment. if yes then your arguements are just words not actions.

_________________________
"Irony is mainly used by the British in in order to distinguish themselves from Americans, which worked very well until the Americans had more guns than them."

Quote:lots of shades of grey. do you eat canned tuna?. a wild fish that has run the gauntlet of disease, other predators etc i.e. not reared and slaughtered in a controled 'humane' envioroment. if yes then your arguements are just words not actions.

How can you agree with the 'shades of grey' and then try and throw an absolute at me? You fish for the thrill of the catch, not food- does that put you on the same level as an organiser of dog fights? I dont think so, but you appear to be less forgiving on the subject

I started my contribution to this whole thread by admitting a certain level of hypocrisy, and the best I can do with tuna is to ensure that it is dolphin friendly, though I have always found that a somewhat amusing concept- may as well call it '100% tuna hostile'. I have probably eaten more tuna than anyone on this board, but, in my defence, it tastes good, and tuna arent cute. As soon as they introduced farmed, or genetically engineered/cloned tuna, I will switch to it immediately I assure you.

The thing about hunters in nature is that they are all about energy efficiency- they secure a territory, and hunt within it. They do not chase excessively long or hard for prey, as they have to balance exertion against reward, and they will happily take carrion over live prey if they can get it- its more convenient.With this in mind, choosing convenient dead meat over playing 'Elmer Fudd' is completely in the tradition of the natural predator. Choosing to go out of your way to hunt when food is available for less effort is a warped interperetation of hunter's instinct, used to validate yet another human pastime that causes death.

The retort to this is that in taking a life, a hunter comes to know the value of a life, and in being prepared to do it, 'earns' the right to the meat on his/her plate.

I understand this argument, and, if you think about my usual ranting on topics I find emotive, I have let hunters off pretty easy on here because I truly do comprehend their reasoning and motivation.

cord i do think we're both singing from the same hymn sheet and we both have moral dilemmas on this topic and I apologise if I sounded a bit pious. anyway, only a few weeks ago my mum went to the wedding of a girl i went to school with (*we were best friends until secondary school. my mum and her mum are still close). she 'recalled' to my mum the times i used to put big black slugs on the road to be crushed by cars when waiting for the school bus. she may have been a straight A student but her memory is p*ss poor because the lads that did this (NOT ME!) were barbarians in my eyes but no way would i risk protesting with them *explains everything

_________________________
"Irony is mainly used by the British in in order to distinguish themselves from Americans, which worked very well until the Americans had more guns than them."